sd-7

Joined

• started 290 topics
• posted 3,788 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by sd-7

• 
  211

  “New light” Watchtower magazine leaked from organization weeks ahead of general release

  by cedars in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://jwsurvey.org/governing-body-2/new-light-watchtower-magazine-leaked-from-organization-weeks-ahead-of-general-release.

  if doctrinal explanations are missing from the article, it is because they are also missing from the magazine.. i would like to give my thanks again to my source for supplying me with the magazine article weeks ahead of its scheduled release.

  it showed remarkable courage, because risks were taken.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sd-7

  I always held the Proclaimers book in awe as a youngster, but the more I'm uncovering in my ongoing research the more I discover that

  Watchtower's

  version of events is almost a complete work of fiction - the type you would expect if the wrong type of people assumed power to begin with.

  I didn't really hold it in awe, myself, but I did think it would equip me against 'apostates' who in my mind at the time, 'think we don't know our own history'. I figured that reading it would enlighten me on that history. Problem is just how all over the map it is--they include sort of timelines but their anecdotes are all over the place, so you have to look at a number of different pages all over the book to piece together a full story about certain events.

  I was just reading the section of the Proclaimers book that discussed that whole shakeup in 1917 with Rutherford dismissing four board members. It is just amazing how dishonest that section is--at least compared to what those board members themselves had to say. I've been reading their response, that 'Light After Darkness' thing? They were saying the exact opposite, and given that it was abundantly clear that Rutherford wanted complete control, rather than sharing power with six other board members (and he changed the bylaws for that very purpose), it seems bizarre that the Proclaimers book actually accuses the other four board members of being greedy for power! And that sets it up so that anyone challenging Rutherford alone is challenging 'the organization'! It's very clear that Russell definitely did not want Rutherford to do what he did, and it's hard to imagine that it was somehow God's will for him to decide that he alone should run the show, especially if there was supposed to be a 'faithful slave class' like they claim, and not just one person.

  Somehow it was considered hypocritical to the WT that those board members, who agreed to leave Bethel, didn't want Rutherford to step down as President, they just wanted him to share power with the board. Seems like a reasonable thing to ask for to me, especially considering that the Society would surely assert there was a Governing Body back then, but if Rutherford alone had all the power, then that's kind of a lie, isn't it? It seems pretty clear that the Proclaimers book accuses those board members of doing the very thing that Rutherford himself did--he wanted the power all to himself and persecuted those who disagreed with him. A common tactic of abusers, I suppose.

  Of course, that said, even though to me, the Proclaimers book is outright lying about what went down back then, it would be hard to convince a JW of that. It's just interesting to finally get to see a different side of that era, and to really understand what, by Watchtower logic, Jesus himself would have observed in the process of his 'inspection'.

  But...history, it is said, is often written by the victors, using the term rather loosely in this case. And since the JWs throw out anyone who dissents, there's no way to learn both sides of the story without going outside the JW box.

  --sd-7
• 
  211

  “New light” Watchtower magazine leaked from organization weeks ahead of general release

  by cedars in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://jwsurvey.org/governing-body-2/new-light-watchtower-magazine-leaked-from-organization-weeks-ahead-of-general-release.

  if doctrinal explanations are missing from the article, it is because they are also missing from the magazine.. i would like to give my thanks again to my source for supplying me with the magazine article weeks ahead of its scheduled release.

  it showed remarkable courage, because risks were taken.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sd-7

  Just finished reading the whole article, cedars. First let me say, a GIANT THUMBS-UP TO YOU, PAL! This is excellent stuff.

  Particularly I was pleased by the chance to research in a little more detail about the transition to Rutherford--even reading the Proclaimers book as a teenager I found that part of JW history to be troubling. I couldn't put my finger on what was wrong with the picture back then, but I knew that (1) this seemed like what would happen in a business out in 'the world', not in the Christian congregation and (2) Rutherford seemed like a real jerk who basically did a hostile takeover and centralized power in himself. But realizing that he basically did some legal wrangling and that there wasn't some 'apostasy' going on like the Society makes it seem in hindsight....really makes them out to be Lying With a Little Extra Tasty Crispy In It. Sorry, it's the first thing that came to mind. Must be hungry.

  It shouldn't amaze me every time they equate themselves to the apostles, to Jesus, or to God, or insert themselves in place of one of those three, but it always does. I'm just blown away at the fact that they used Matthew 4:4 to justify their authority. Matthew 4:4. And John 17:3. So they're saying that "man does not live on bread alone, but on every utterance coming through [the faithful slave's] mouth." And "this means everlasting life, taking in knowledge of you, the only [faithful slave], and of the one who [will give you authority over all his belongings], Jesus Christ."

  Hmm. Maybe they do need to write a new Bible, or maybe they already have, and that's what'll be released at the convention. Because this taking of such unbelievable liberties with the scriptures is...well, blasphemy is the only thing that comes to mind. To me, this is actually worse than say if you just don't believe in God. To basically say you are God, you are the mouth of God, and are to be obeyed as if you're God...it's usurping the throne of God. And of the Lamb, 'cause salvation is now attributed to obeying you. Hmm. Now that I think of it, guess that means all JWs have removed themselves from the 'great crowd' if they obey the 'slave', because they're commanded to say or at least indicate by their actions, "Salvation we owe to the faithful slave".

  The other factor here is that we have a 'faithful slave' that, at the time of its appointment by Jesus, was promoting to the world that someone else was the 'faithful slave', predicting the resurrection in 1925 that didn't happen, and basically effing things up. It didn't get any better when the baton was passed to the next [ahem, the same] generation, either. And then of course, Jesus appointed them, 96 years ago, so therefore that means we should obey you? Does not compute. Thus the, shall we call it modified apostolic succession?

  It highlights one of the big problems of this religion. It's very interested in making sure every failing of everyone else is underscored, published, committee'd (just made up a word'd), but it can basically bend or break the very rules it condemns everyone else over. Of course, logical reasoning dictates that this doesn't mean they're wrong by definition; it merely means they are hypocrites. Hypocrites can be right, at least in the sense that a broken clock can be right twice a day, but in this case it just happens that they're utterly mistaken and hypocrites at the same time.

  But clearly, in order for this to even fit together, they should've added that Jesus gave the 1919 members of the 'slave' the authority to appoint additional members as older ones died off. Except that they can merely rely on apostolic parallel (ie. appointing Matthias to replace Judas Iscariot).

  It does seem convenient that despite Jesus saying people would be worshipping with spirit and truth and that location wouldn't matter anymore, apparently Brooklyn/Wallkill/Warwick/Upstate New York Somewhere is now the New Jerusalem of sorts, since apparently Jesus picked only the people who were stationed there in service. One does wonder why no one from the rest of humanity was ever picked. When you see such a specific application of a scripture that is only clear in that it is vague and non-specific, your brain has got to register that the square peg has been shoved into the round hole with a rather vigorous force, and there are a lot of cracks showing where there shouldn't be any if it actually fits.

  I think the fact that four Watchtower articles were devoted to this subject--four consecutive Watchtower Studies, four hours of worship time--goes to show just how very serious all of this is for them, for the Society. And how troubling this really is for people who are awake and realize what's going on. I find it offensive that a meeting of this nature, opened and closed with prayers in Jesus' name, could be discussing and glorifying the acts of men and the authority of men--even going so far as to tell Jesus what he's going to do!

  There is no 'faithful and discreet slave' class. There is only the Master, the Governing Body, cloaking itself in the garments of a slave, appearing to serve, appearing to be something they simply are not. It is inconceivable (I keep using that word, but it does mean what I think it means) that these men on the Governing Body could read these articles and approve their publication without being profoundly troubled in their Christian consciences as to what role they are assigning to themselves in front of the entire congregation. What sort of example is this setting for elders, for husbands, for the love of...

  AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGH!!!

  

  --sd-7
• 
  42

  Internet is right now mocking Memorial tract - hurry before taken down by BORG. Here is the link

  by BluePill2 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  remember the guys that started the shit storm with the deaf sign language video?

  the multiple funny versions at youtube?.

  this time they are mocking the tract (the guy that started this isn't even a ex-jw, but they are pretty good at taking down cults!).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sd-7

  Oh, man. That is classic. You just totally made my Friday.

  --sd-7
• 
  19

  Is the WTBTS Responsible for What Attendees Do After an Assembly?

  by PaintedToeNail in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  this is in response to jim tx's comment on another thread.

  the wtbts claims that the organizers of events such as a congregation picnic or a party are responsible for what the attendees do after the event has ended.

  example: if several people meet and engage in 'fornication' afterwards, the organizer is culpable.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sd-7

  Most of us adults accept responsibility for our own behavior because we don't have masters to explain to us what is proper and improper. If you're all grown up, you should know how to behave yourself and not accept being talked down to because you had an evening of relaxation and/or amusement. Life's too short for this nonsense.

  Right. I think there ought to be common sense involved when a person has a party--not a "gathering", what is this, an alien abduction? "Gathering"?

  Anyway, the main thing for such a person would be, not being responsible for the behavior of fellow adults as if they're to be policemen--oh, we would need that for the "cleanest people on earth"?--but to make sure that wherever you're having the party is a safe enough place for all invited. Nobody wants strangers crashing the party or for minors to get alcohol (if it's illegal for minors to drink where you live). Or for so many people to be there that your deck can't hold them all and there's an accident. Or your electrical setup is overloaded by sound systems and a fire starts.

  But as for the other stuff, you can't make adults who want to do something stop doing it, and you can't watch everyone every second. But really, should we expect the Society to take responsibility even for the stuff they tell JWs to do? Of course not. Why would we? Even when you're expected to die for their teachings, it's still "your personal decision". Right? And they assume no responsibility for the consequences of that. So they're not going to assume responsibility for anything else.

  That said, this may evidently mean that that young brother and sister who met at the convention and went back and hooked up at a hotel room were acting alone, and solely responsible. The Governing Body cannot be approached by local elders for a judicial committee for hosting the occasion where the young man and woman met.

  We appreciate your inquiry and hope this clears the matter up for you.

  Warm Christian Love,

  sd-7
• 
  211

  “New light” Watchtower magazine leaked from organization weeks ahead of general release

  by cedars in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://jwsurvey.org/governing-body-2/new-light-watchtower-magazine-leaked-from-organization-weeks-ahead-of-general-release.

  if doctrinal explanations are missing from the article, it is because they are also missing from the magazine.. i would like to give my thanks again to my source for supplying me with the magazine article weeks ahead of its scheduled release.

  it showed remarkable courage, because risks were taken.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sd-7

  that slave has been closely associated with the Governing body of Jehovah’s Witnesses

  Come on, guys. Don't you know bullsh-- words when you read them? "Closely associated with" is Watchtowerese for "the same as". Let's fix this sentence:

  "...that slave has been the same as the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses."

  There!

  --sd-7
• 
  211

  “New light” Watchtower magazine leaked from organization weeks ahead of general release

  by cedars in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://jwsurvey.org/governing-body-2/new-light-watchtower-magazine-leaked-from-organization-weeks-ahead-of-general-release.

  if doctrinal explanations are missing from the article, it is because they are also missing from the magazine.. i would like to give my thanks again to my source for supplying me with the magazine article weeks ahead of its scheduled release.

  it showed remarkable courage, because risks were taken.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sd-7

  Wow. Okay, I guess I'll have to pour myself a tall glass of something and dissect this one later. Quite a lengthy discussion, cedars, but impressive. I skimmed a lot of it, particularly intrigued by the insider stuff about Rutherford. What's funny is that even looking at his picture in the Proclaimers book as a teenager, I had this thought, "He looks kinda evil...like he would be a jerk or something." Even the JW recounting of the transition, in my mind, was deeply troubling back when I read it.

  But...I don't know. I have a feeling this issue is going to spawn like, soooooooo many new threads. Ha ha ha...isn't it funny? The Society seems to have us as its most avid followers, in a sick sort of way. Maybe I should stop reading their stuff and move on, but...it's like a car wreck, man! I can't stop staring at it!

  --sd-7
• 
  67

  There are really TWO Watchtower Societies

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  with cedars release of leaked watchtower new light "adjusting" understanding of "who" the faithful and discreet slave is.....i am struck by something which similarly struck me back in 1967.in 1967 i had just been imprisoned.

  being a male jehovah's witness during the viet nam war meant certain "issues" arose affecting a decision to respond to the military draft.i have told the story before.

  but, i'd like go at it from another angle in view of the above mentioned new light about the fds fora different reason.it was first in 1967 i began to discover that there are two watchtower societies.let me explain why i say this and for what reasons.first of all, anybody standing in a kingdom hall or sitting in a seat at a vast international assembly saw people they would identify as all on the same page.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sd-7

  When a "critical mass" of doubts has a head on collision with a PERSONAL problem inside the congregation the cat is out of the bag!

  The time comes for a clash between the rational and the submissive.

  You hit it right on the head there, Terry. I totally identify. I was always disappointed that few people were even able to discuss anything deep relating to the doctrine. To be honest, I don't think I ever really discussed any of the deeper stuff with anyone. I read the literature with interest, but definitely the doubts built up and I consciously swept them under the rug, and then a personal problem brought it all flying back to memory, along with a particular realization: there were people the Society was afraid of, so afraid that they didn't want JWs to even talk to those people. Why? And there it was. So true, man. What a great thread. --sd-7
• 
  23

  Innapropriate for young children? Scare tactics?

  by The Quiet One in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  gods word for us through jeremiah page 128 '..his mother bought a ram and a ewe.

  he looked after them, and the ewe produced two lambs a year, so the flock began to grow..."early one morning while i was still in bed," he recalls, "i heard them bleating.

  when i finally did, i saw a pack of wild dogs running away from my lambs, which had their bellies ripped open.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sd-7

  Dude. That's a very graphic story. Definitely R-rated. What?

  Either way, I think there's a key difference here: if the elders were involved, they'd be trying to get a confession of some kind of sin out of the dying sheep as it was bleeding to death.

  Elder: "So, what were you wearing when they attacked you? Where were you, exactly? Did you say anything to provoke them?"

  Sheep: "Baaaaa..."

  Elder: "Okay, uh, can you step outside for a moment? We need to...oh...we'll just step away from you, brother."

  --sd-7
• 
  26

  Faithful and Discreet Slave parable through the three gospels

  by pixel in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  this is the parable of the faithful and discreet slave, put up from the three gospels, so you can see their differences (3 gospels out of 4 relate this):.

  matthew 24:42-51: (prefered by the gb/fds/gb).

  42 keep on the watch, therefore, because ?you?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sd-7

  It's a question, not a statement. Therein lies the problem with the Society's interpretation of those verses. It doesn't say "there will be a faithful and discreet slave", it says "Who really is?" Proving oneself to be faithful and discreet does not of itself grant one authority, especially not at the 'beginning of the end', as you haven't really proven anything at that point. The context clearly shows the suddenness of the actual end, and the need to be ready for that, not for the 'start of the last days' or something.

  But if these verses were never written, anyone wanting to gain power would just find a different set to justify it. There you have it.

  --sd-7
• 
  7

  Obnoxious book study!

  by stillin in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i often prepare quickly for the study in the jeremiah book.

  there's no real substance, nothing challenging, so it doesn't take long.

  the annoying thing is the direction as to what material is to be covered.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  sd-7

  Like it's chapter and verse or something!

  Well, the daily text is already using that sort of notation, last I checked. Might as well be doing that, I mean, right??

  --sd-7